Borgopolis
-
Content Count
83 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Never
Posts posted by Borgopolis
-
-
croqoa said:
Just wanted to clarify one rule quick: When an army is forced to flee from a losing battle, all of its units are routed as well. If an opponent then moves a single unit into the area they retreated to, the routed units don't even join the battle, and thus they automatically lose the fight 1-0 and are all destroyed?You're correct IMO that a single standing unit can destroy an entire routed army by moving into the routed army's area, forcing them to retreat and thus be destroyed.
croqoa said:I understand the logic behind it, but it makes it incredibly difficult (if not impossible) to attack somebody's stronghold with the goal of weakening it for a second attack to take it, since your army can be attacked by a single archer and wiped out completely.Since you can activate a certain area only once a year, I think you will not be able to "attack somebody's stronghold with the goal of weakening it for a second attack to take it"
Sure you can attack it again, but that will be the "next year" and by then your army is "standing"again.
The only way to attack the same area twice IN THE SAME YEAR would be if there were a way to remove the activation token you put in that area ( like with the Warfare Strategy Card in TI3 )
... or you could of course ... attack in Winter and then attack the same area again in the spring of the following year ... that gives you two consecutive attacks.
-
You may find this post interesting
http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_foros_discusion.asp?efid=162&efcid=1&efidt=241041
-
Lindsey said:
Concern 1: I suspect the blind bidding of influence, along with all bids (including losing bids) being lost, is sometimes going to give fluky results. Did that really test better than just having the winner discard the influence?I agree that losing all influence with a losing bid does not seem ideal and will result in a lot of times players bidding nothing at all.
Look at the bidding example at page 32 of the rulebook.
The example is clear enough but really lacks any "realism" if you ask me.
The Elf player has the most available influence - 4 - and is also most likely to win any tiebreakers in this example.
He can either outbid everyone, or in case of a tie he's going to win because he has most Influence Left.
The Uthuk player gambles and bids all he's got - 2 influence - but can really only win if both other players bid less than 2 Influence - very unlikely considering we're bidding for a Rune here - and he cannot win any tiebreaker.
If I were the Uthuk player I'd save up my 2 influence here and spend them on something with better odds.
The Human player's bid of 1 influence is completely unrealistic IMO as this bid assumes the Elf player is not going to bid at least 1 Influence when he has 4 influence available and is going to win any tiebreaker, so this bid of 1 influence is a complete throwaway
So, In this example : ( in a realistic bid IMO )
The Uthuk player should bid : zero
The Elf player should either gamble that the Human player doesn't bid all he's got and bid 2 or play sure and bid 3
The Human player should either bid zero or go all out and bid 3 in the hope the Elf Player gambled with 2.
-
I'm kinda wondering why the Quest Cards are used to randomize the tiles during set-up instead of simply using the Fate Cards for this purpose as well.
The Quest Cards need extra text for this purpose and we'll probably need new Set-Up Quest Cards if new tiles would be added with an expansion,
while the purpose of the Fate cards is exactly to be used as a 'randomizer' for many purposes AND they have numbers ranging from 1 to 30 on them, so you can expand up till you have 30 different tiles until you ever run out of cards for this purpose. Strange that they don't use their randomizing element to randomize set-up.
I really like the fact that in battle you have to continue to deal damage to units which are already damaged.
It makes sense and is a necessary rule though, otherwise Units like Siege Towers, Dark Knights and Giants would make too much of "damage sinks" which would probably unbalance the game.
-
Seem to have hit that one on the head as well
-
DarkElf said:
From what I've been reading in the previews so far, my guess is the combat system will work somewhat like this :
EDITED 25.11.09
- When the active player moves one or more of his units into an area that contains enemy units, a battle takes place.
Got that right.
DarkElf said:
- Each player that has one or more "Initiative 1" units in the battle draws 1 Fate Card per unit ( probably attacker drawing first ) and resolves the result(s).
Example : the attacker has 3 archers and draws 3 " 1-damage" result Fate Cards : this means his archers inflict 3 damage altogether.The defender has no "Initiative 1" unit(s) in the battle, so he doesn't draw a Fate Card.
Got that right
DarkElf said:
- Then, each player that has one or more ( surviving and standing ) "Initiative 2" units left in the battle draws 1 Fate Card for each of those units and applies the result(s).
Got that right.
DarkElf said:
( If he can't withdraw, my guess is his remainig troops are destroyed, ... so better keep an escape route open at all times.If the battle is a draw, my guess is the attacker has to withdraw. )
Correct on both accounts.
DarkElf said:
- During each Initiative round during combat, Tactics Cards can be played to influence the outcome of the battle.
Apparently you can only play Tactic cards at the start of the battle, not before every round ( as in WotR )
DarkElf said:
- After each battle the drawn Fate Cards go back into the Fate Deck and the deck is reshuffled.
Got that one wrong, as the main reshuffling mechanic seems to be tied in with the Autumn Cards.
Not bad after all, I guess.
-
Johncraven said:
I'd rather they get the rules perfect the first time than to release "patches" of FAQs afterwards and confusing the heck out of everyone. I'm sure you would agree.
Sure, but the rules are already finished and printed, the game is on the boat ... the rules are not under development anymore ...
-
TheDukester said:
DarkElf said:
That's more than two months ago already and still no rules online.
You would have lasted about 20 minutes Back In The Day. Rules posted online? Hell, with some rare exceptions, we didn't even know about the new games coming out until they showed up on the shelves.
Yes, that's correct, but we're not " Back In The Day" anymore aren't we ?
There's been an invention called the internet since then ....
I can understand them building up some anticipation, but this shouldn't drag on for months IMO.
Get us four or five previews, sure, but then get the rules up please.
What's the purpose of dragging this out like this ... ?
-
The first Runewars preview dates from october 14th ...... That's more than two months ago already and still no rules online.
How much longer are they going to milk this thing ... ? Does it really matter so much to them to keep us in the dark ?
-
Seboss said:
Now I just hope RW keeps downtime to a minimum (another main gripe about TI:3), but we'll have to wait for the rules on turn sequence to make any judgment about this.
Agree here.
I also hope RW is really playable with two players, ( in the sense of being an optimal number ) in which case it should definitely be playable in an evening session and downtime should be minimal. From what I've read so far, a 2 player game looks very promising to me.
-
Not trying to push anyone here, but since there seem to be a lot of people very eager to read the rules ... could you at least give us a date when you plan to put the rules online.
Checking the Runewars Support page all the time and finding the same old "Watch this space for Runewars related content." gets boring after a while.
Thanks in advance.
Anybody else like to support this humble request ?
-
broken said:
Of course, that's only if they trigger their special ability.
... which won't happen that often with Triangle units ( as I expect them to have the lowest Orb percentage - around 20% IMO )
-
Charian said:
Anyway, wether or not 'stacks of doom' -cool term,btw- appear on any gameboard depends more on the playstyle of the ppl involved than on the game itself IMHO. Even a stack of doom can only control 1 space at a time.
It controls only 1 space at a time alright, but it annihilates everything it encounters on its path and is often a surefire way to victory for the "leading" player.
I wouldn't say it depends on the playstyle of the people involved, but rather that it's often the playstyle of those who know how to win the game.
-
Charian said:
......... the Elf sorceress ......................... she's a whole lot weaker than 2 of the other circle units.
I agree that she looks weaker.
The Necromancer activates earlier ( initiative 2 ) and can bring extra bodies to the fight and the Warlock brings death and destruction.
The Sorceress however has the ability ( I think ) to break up army stacks, which may impact the opponent's movement options the next turn. Seperated units may also be easy "prey" for other army stacks.
We'll have to wait and see how this works out within the rest of the game rules.
-
Charian said:
Yes, that would be my guess as well. But atm, the only risk of applying damage to big units is the Elf Warrior's ability, just like you mentioned. Perhaps some Tactics cards will have simular effects, but still, it would probably be worth the risk and make bigger units quite powerful.
Oh well, we simply have to wait until the rules get published. I've got a lot of other questions, like the wording of the Elf sorceress ability: 'retreat' instead of 'rout'. Does this difference mean anything? Otherwise, she's a whole lot weaker than 2 of the other circle units.
"Retreat" means the unit will be taken out of the hex to an adjacent hex
A "routed" unit will remain in the battle hex but will likely be put "on its back" to signify it being routed and not being able to attack in that battle.
-
Bleached Lizard said:
It would mean that the player who controlled all the land would be able to create uber-stacks of monsters,
The player controlling most of the land is able to recruit more units than his opponent already as it is.
Saying that that player would be able to create uber-stacks if the army size limit I suggested would be used is not quite correct as this same player would be able to create even bigger uber-stacks if that size limit weren't there, correct ?
Bleached Lizard said:
whereas the poor trailing players who need to be able to create uber-stacks in order to take their land back will instead be forced to go into combat with a single sorcerer. I can't see that working well.
The trailing player's army will most likely be smaller anyway, regardless of Army Size Limit or not, since he can't recruit as many units as his stronger opponent.
Putting a cap on how many units of any given type can be in an army may very well hinder the stronger player more than the weaker player because the stronger player can't assemble all his power in one area and from there on steamroll the weaker opponent.
So, IMO, having an army size limit is going to be more of a game-balancing mechanism than not having an army size limit.
You may be correct of course that the Army Size Limit mechanic I suggested here may not be in the game at all and another mechanism is used.
We'll have to wait and see on that one.
-
Good spotting
broken said:
How do you reconcile this:
DarkElf said:
I'd say that is highly unlikely to be possible, so I'm fairly sure at this point that there will be a unit cap and only one Fate Card will be drawn per unit type.
broken said:
with this:DarkElf said:
Honestly, that would be a very poor mechanism because it's all about hit or miss.
If they hit they all hit, if they miss they all miss, no middleground.
I don't think it's going to be that way.
?
When I say " that is highly unlikely" I'm referring to having something like 5 or more Flesh Rippers in 1 army because their Special Ability would become insane when triggered. So, I guess there will be some kind of Army Size Limit that prevents this from happening.
If you could have no more than 2 Sorceresses or 2 Chaos Lords for instance in any given army I can see the combat mechanic of drawing just one Fate Card per unit type working.
After reading the fourth preview however and interpreting the Beastman Special Ability, it looks more like each unit is allowed to draw 1 Fate Card, so I'll probably be wrong on the aforementioned statement... in which case this sentence from the second preview "When any number of Skeleton Archers attacks, the player controlling them draws a Fate Card from the appropriate deck." seems to deliberately put us on the wrong foot. Not sure why.
The second statement is different from the first statement in the sense that it would be a very poor mechanism if there would be no army size limit.
When you can mass as many units together in one stack as you want, then drawing 1 Fate Card is a very poor mechanic.
They either all hit, all miss, all deal Rout or all trigger their Special Abilty.
That would be very unpredictable and thus luck based combat.
However, if the number of units in an army couldn't be more than 2 to 4 per type, then drawing just 1 card per type would be a more acceptable mechanic IMO and could probably make sense because there wouldn't be so many units whose result would depend on that one card.
So, my point here is, the mechanic becomes worse as more units are affected by it.
-
I just read the fourth preview and figured there was a lot of info to gather from that one.
The info that especially stood out IMO was the text on the Beastman Special Ability :
COMMAND : Deal 1 damage and then draw and resolve a new fate card ( limit once per Beastman )
Especially the part between brackets is interesting.
This seems to imply that during combat each Beastman that gets an Orb on its first Fate Card may deal 1 damage and draw one additional Fate Card.
Meaning : in general, in combat , you draw one Fate Card for each (standing) unit. ( which would make most sense IMO )
Or is there any other way you can interpret that Special Ability wording ?
Something else seems to support this theory, the Hit Points of the Dragon and the Giant.
If you're facing a Giant, how in the world are you supposed to take this guy out with an Archer army if you draw only one fate Card for the entire Archer stack ? It's impossible.
If every unit in the stack draws one Fate Card however .... then you may have a shot ( though you might need about 9 Archers to deal statistically 5 damage to the Giant )
This is going in the right direction IMO,
if we now also can have an army size limit to prevent stacks of doom I think this is going to be a super game.
-
Steve-O said:
I was assuming that drawing a Fate card that deals 1 damage meant 1 damage PER UNIT of that type. So if you had 10 Daqan Archers and drew a card for 1 damage, you did 10 damage to the enemy. Orbs may or may not work that way, but that seems like the most obvious way for damage to work, to me.
Honestly, that would be a very poor mechanism because it's all about hit or miss.
If they hit they all hit, if they miss they all miss, no middleground.
I don't think it's going to be that way.
-
Bleached Lizard said:
Wouldn't your idea be somewhat unbalanced, in that it would allow the strong to get stronger and the force the weak to get weaker?
Well, I don't know, I don't think so because ..
The resource dials do not change unless you play the harvest order card, so taking a hex away from an opponent doesn't immediately change his dials.
There may very well be time to take the area back ... or take another area before the dials get reset ... or take an action so that excess units get into another area before the dials are reset ... and there may be more actions available to counter the loss of an area/resource.
Your army may not be maxed out in units from the resource you just lost, meaning, for example you just lost a Food area but your armies are maxed out with Wood units, so, no real harm done there.
I'm sure it will be a valid strategy to attack certain areas which contain resources which are vital to your opponent's armies.
And maybe the most important reason why I think this would not unbalace things is that it doesn't matter how many units you have of a certain type. If you have just one in your army, you draw a Date Card and you can do battle. 2 or 3 units have just as much odds to hit/miss as one.
It will make a difference though in the strength count, but that's the point of it I reckon.
-
DarkElf said:
broken said:
On an Orb every Flesh Reaper in battle gets 3 Hit Points instead of 1 and this is an Initiative 1 unit so its ability can trigger before any other's of your army.
Imagine you can just stock up on that unit, say five in an army and you get 1 Fate Card per unit = 5 fate cards , almost certainly giving you an Orb.
That would mean these units now get 15 Hit Points.
You can sink 10 damage in them without losing a unit.
Correction : it's Flesh Ripper, not Reaver
and the 3 hit points are until end of battle so they die anyway after taking one hit, but the point is, they would be able to soak up a lot of damage if you were allowed to have an unlimited amount of them in your army.
-
broken said:
While that's certainly an interesting idea, I think it would make producing units a little problematic (assuming you can't just produce units anywhere you want), especially early on in the game - even more so if you start out with units.
I don't think this will be a problem, Broken.
Take a look at the Recruit Order Card. You only get to recruit units from 1 or 2 resource dials, not all three your dials, so it will be important to make sure you get units "out of the area" before you "recruit" new units of the same type to get the maximum out of your recruiting.
I also assume each player will start the game without any units on the board because your dials do not start at "zero" but rather at a fixed starting number and you have the recruit Order to cash in on that.
I'm guessing the text on top of the order cards will apply to all players in the game, while the player who played the order also gets the bottom effect.
Reason for that is the Harvest Order Card.
If only you would get the top effect, why would you ever play that card again as long as your resources are lower than the last time you played the Order. You could potentially cheat this way by keeping your arrows high while in reality not possessing any resources at all.
I'm also almost completely convinced there must be some kind of troop limit when I look at the Flesh Reaper's special ability.
On an Orb every Flesh Reaper in battle gets 3 Hit Points instead of 1 and this is an Initiative 1 unit so its ability can trigger before any other's of your army.
Imagine you can just stock up on that unit, say five in an army and you get 1 Fate Card per unit = 5 fate cards , almost certainly giving you an Orb.
That would mean these units now get 15 Hit Points.
You can sink 10 damage in them without losing a unit.
I'd say that is highly unlikely to be possible, so I'm fairly sure at this point that there will be a unit cap and only one Fate Card will be drawn per unit type.
... though there still could be something in there which we haven't seen yet and which changes everything ... ah the wait ...
-
As an encore : taking into account the above mentioned supply limits, this is what each race could field in any given area with maxed out Resource Dials
Daqam Lords : 11 units
4 Footman 3 Archers 2 Knights 2 Siege Towers
Uthuk Y'llan : 11 units
4 Berserkers 3 Warlocks 2 Flesh Rippers 2 Chaos Lords
Undying : 11 units
4 Reanimates 3 Skeleton Archers 2 Necromancers 2 Dark Knights
Latari Elves : 11 units
4 Archers 3 Warriors 2 Sorceresses 2 Pegasus Riders
-
TI3 has the Fleet Supply mechanism, which regulates the maximum amount of (capitol) ships you may have in any given hex.
I favour such a mechanism because it prevents the much dreaded "stack of doom" from taking control of every game and annihilating most other strategic approaches.
So far I haven't seen any indication yet that there will be such a mechanism in Runewars as well, though I really hope so.
It could be a very good and elegant system really.
How ?
The answer is in the Resource Dials ( right in front of you and clearly visible for everyone )
Suppose you're playing Elves and you have your arrows pointing at
4 food = 2 Warriors
5 Wood = 3 Archers
5 ore = 1 Sorceres and 1 Pegasus Rider
There you have it : each area you control may hold no more than 2 Warriors + 3 Archers + 1 Sorceress + 1 Pegasus Rider.
Get your Resource Dial Arrows up and you increase the number of specific units you can have in a stack, when your Arrows go down, you may have to slim down your armies ( yes, discarding units )
Thus, sizeable armies are possible ( with maxed out Resource Dials ) but you can't stack every unit you have in one area and move your Stack of Doom from one area to another.
Players having maxed out armies will have to watch out carefully for when the Harvest Order Card can be played and Dials are readjusted as I expect that armies will have to adjust to Supply changes immediately, thus there is a chance of losing units in some armies simply because your Resource Dials go " down".
Looking at it from this perspective, you'll never have more than 2 Sorceresses and 2 Pegasus Riders in any army, so drawing 1 Fate card per unit type during battle seems a more reasonable mechanism and isn't as "luck" based anymore as most people are currently assuming ( in case you can have any number of units in any given army. )
Drawing just 1 Fate Card for a stack of 10 Archers seems like a very poor and luck based mechanism, not even mentioning not being able to score more than 1 Hit.
However, since the Elves could only have 4 Archers max in a stack, I think I could live with the "draw 1 Fate Card Mechanism" in battle as the other Elves would be there to soak up enemy damage and to help you win the Strength count.
Another possibilty ( though unlikely ) would be to let you Draw 1 Fate Card per unit = 4 Fate cards in case you have 4 Archers
but ... choose one Fate Card to play as their battle result. This could make battles more tactical ...
As a conclusion : I would really like a hard limit to the number of units you can have in a certain area as it prevents endless " build-ups" and turtling and besides, there's only so much room in each area, you probaly can't have too great amounts of figures in them without cluttering up the board. If maxed out armies are not easy to get as well , due to the limitation of Resources, we could see alot of interesting battles between "smaller" armies.
Good, look forward to that.
Sneak Peek Event - let reports roll in !!!
in Runewars
Posted
Not a lot of reports rolling in ... in fact ... nada so far.